Early in the second quarter, it was announced in the press box that Tomlinson had a "sore knee" and that he "can return."

Afterward, Tomlinson said: "It's obvious that I couldn't play. If I could have played, I would have been in there."

Asked about the situation on Monday, Turner said: "There was some miscommunication on whatever happens in the heat of the game. But shortly after the first quarter, I was not of the opinion that he would return to the game."

Some fans and TV commentators have questioned Tomlinson's toughness.

The Chargers wouldn't say who passed word to the press box that Tomlinson could return.

Tomlinson originally was hurt in the win over the Colts. The team said L.T.'s knee was hyperextended, but Tomlinson said after the loss to the Patriots that he has a sprained medial collateral ligament. He said he won't need surgery.

This burns my ***. This is such BS! If he had a broken leg then he was trying to make up for the ghost of wide right. He was afraid to lose his job because he sucks so much in the playoffs. That ******** should have been placed on IR. It is one thing for a QB to play with a leg injury but a kicker?? I bet he was hiding this from the coaching staff. AJ needs to man up and cut his ***.!

This just goes to show that he is not a team player. You have to do what is best for the team. Kicking with a broken leg is not best for the team.

Click to expand...

Dude, you can't hide a broken leg from the team. Especially when as soon as it happens they take you into the locker room and examine you. The coaches wouldn't let him kick if they thought there was an alternative. I'd rather have Nate kicking field goals than Rayner.

I'm honestly tired of everyone assuming the worst about Nate. He is a GOOD KICKER and if he was kicking on a broken leg it was not in spite of the team's needs, it was BECAUSE of the team's needs. You think Nate wanted to be out there kicking field goals, when he knew he was hurt really badly? When he knew it would be even harder than normal to be accurate? The mere fact that he made as many field goals as he did with the injury speaks volumes about his talent and character. How easy would it have been for him to tell the coaches that he just wasn't up to it, forcing Rayner (who apparently just plain sucks) to do it? Very easy. But instead he went out there and made 11 out of 13 field goal tries. 11 out of 13!! That's 85%! A very, very good percentage, even with a broken leg! Face facts, the guy is a very good kicker and does not deserve to be cut, but deserves props for doing his job even when severely hurt.

my intrepretation of your "team player concept" is that iit is a parallel to the LT situation, i.e. LT was a good team player by sitt'in and lett'in burner play.
so did you want rayner kick'in FGs? or what scrub should we have got off the couch to kick in the playoffs?

Dude, you can't hide a broken leg from the team. Especially when as soon as it happens they take you into the locker room and examine you. The coaches wouldn't let him kick if they thought there was an alternative. I'd rather have Nate kicking field goals than Rayner.

I'm honestly tired of everyone assuming the worst about Nate. He is a GOOD KICKER and if he was kicking on a broken leg it was not in spite of the team's needs, it was BECAUSE of the team's needs. You think Nate wanted to be out there kicking field goals, when he knew he was hurt really badly? When he knew it would be even harder than normal to be accurate? The mere fact that he made as many field goals as he did with the injury speaks volumes about his talent and character. How easy would it have been for him to tell the coaches that he just wasn't up to it, forcing Rayner (who apparently just plain sucks) to do it? Very easy. But instead he went out there and made 11 out of 13 field goal tries. 11 out of 13!! That's 85%! A very, very good percentage, even with a broken leg! Face facts, the guy is a very good kicker and does not deserve to be cut, but deserves props for doing his job even when severely hurt.

my intrepretation of your "team player concept" is that iit is a parallel to the LT situation, i.e. LT was a good team player by sitt'in and lett'in burner play.
so did you want rayner kick'in FGs? or what scrub should we have got off the couch to kick in the playoffs?

no, no no, you would be defending LT by him sitt'in an' lett'in Burner play, i.e. bein' a good teammate.
back to the topic, who should we have picked up that would'a been better in the playoffs than kae-dog?